Sunday, 30 December 2012

Angry Lurker Honest Movie Review 91: The Hobbit Part 1 (4 STARS).

"Bilbo Baggins is swept into a quest to reclaim the lost dwarf kingdom of Erebor from the fearsome dragon Smaug"


While I was off my mate booked tickets for "The Hobbit" even though I was a little unwell ( I apologise to the other patrons of which there wasn't a lot on a Christmas Saturday afternoon for the occasional sneezing and coughing fits!)

I read The Hobbit a long time in the early days of my security career and remember fecking little except for the dragon, gold and some dwarfs, so I was quite happy to watch it with little idea of a story and after a visual slapping of my eyes and ears I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed the movie, great effects, great action, great acting, Martin Freeman played Martin Freeman (never liked him until the new BBC TV series "Sherlock Holmes"), the dwarves were excellent (real good bunch of actors) and Gandalf was "Gandalf".

It's a series of stories as the group of dwarfs, Bilbo and Gandalf head for Erebor with appearances from Galadriel, Elrond, Gollum, the goblins and goblin king are some of the better bad guys and there's a bit of orc bad blood as well.

I thoroughly enjoyed it and there was no sign of the dreaded numb bum for a long movie (166 mins I believe) but it gets 4 STARS and no more and that's because I don't like to wait for the next fecking instalment, 2 more fecking parts, 2 more fecking years, Peter Jackson is extracting the urine big time. 

I need to read the book again......... 

51 comments:

  1. Good to hear it was enjoyable; plan to see it. I agree with the three part complaint. Same amount of movie time for the Hobbit as the LOTR?
    Oh well, Happy New Year!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I watched it on IMAX in 3D and enjoyed it immensely. I did have to shake my willy once after slurping a 20 ox Sprite (not available in New York). If you go to IMDB, you will see that the follow-up is already in post production.

    Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yep. I loved it. We actually went back to see it again with the kids. It's like the best prequel ever! But I do agree with you about it being split up over the years....it's all done! Just release it already!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, My General...Hail Franonia!...your review has been the catalyst that will get me to the theater to view this film.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Looking forward to seeing this one.

    Happy new year mate

    ReplyDelete
  6. good to hear its good, going to see it for my birthday.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hey it's Hollywood, this is their new big movie, so of course it's going to be their new big trilogy. Though really it sounds pretty damn awesome and I'll probably check it out at some point.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I wanna see this, but 3 films? How the Feck can they get 3 films out of that tiddly book???

    ReplyDelete
  9. I haven't seen it yet, but my daughter reports the first instalment as overlong. The last hour makes up somewhat for a long wait, by her reckoning, but her overall impression was one of slight disappointment. I think I might be waiting for the DVD.

    It seemed to me that The Hobbit could be split into two, especially at 166 minutes the time, ending the first at Beorn's house. This doesn't do violence to the story's 3-part structure, as Beorn's house is clearly the half-way resting point in the second part.

    A single movie - even a 3-hour movie - might not have been sufficient to do the book justice, as quite a lot happens within it. The Hobbit is a deal faster paced than LOTR in my view...

    Having said all that, I have yet to read an altogether negative review: most have been very positive. Peter Jackson has established strong credentials as a story-teller in film. He must be doing something right!
    Cheers,
    Ion

    ReplyDelete
  10. Loved it but like you hate waiting for the next parts to appear.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Not seen it yet. Though i'm told this isn't just the Hobbit story it pulls in bits from other books that run through the same time period I.E The Necromancer

    ReplyDelete
  12. just year and a half, Lurk, the third part will be out in the summer 2014 :) after second part in December 2013

    ReplyDelete
  13. I saw it last night. Lots of activity and the dwarves are great. I can't believe I have to wait another year!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yes! I loved this movie when I saw it the other day. Fantastic, all of it! Now I´m thinking about to paint some of those orcs...

    ReplyDelete
  15. I thought it dragged at a few parts, and found that there was no real ending, no closing feeling problems resolved. It shouldn't be a problem in about 5 years, when I will have all 3 movies on DVD in my hands, but for now the end ruined it for me.
    FF

    ReplyDelete
  16. Good skills Fran, however I am still of two minds whether I can be bothered going to see it at the big screen. We had a over hobbit orientated few months down here.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I was concerned about this one going all 'hurr durr visual effects', especially as the book is a lot more of a child's tale than high fantasy, but seeing how the non-Tolkien fans tend to like it and give it good reviews (and you too!) I'm more than eager to watch it. Speaking of Mr Freeman, 'Sherlock' had brought some fame already and is there a bit of a connection with the 'unimportant' figure he made there? And making three full length movies out of one tiny book, well, just pretend it's not for the profit.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think the movie was a little too long. The good parts were really good but there were a few bits that really dragged for me. We saw the regular version but the visuals were fantastic. My wife didn't realize that it was going to be multi-part, that was a let down for her.

    ReplyDelete
  19. We went as a family yesterday and all of us LOVED it, even our 13 year girl who I thought for sure was going to have complaints about how long it was but not one complaint from her (unless not having enough popcorn counts). We saw the 3D version and it was well worth it. The first time I've seen something in 3D in about four years and I'm glad it was this because it rocked. We can't wait for the next one!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Glad you enjoyed it. I saw it with the family before Christmas and we loved it (i even wrote a review). Looking forward to the next part even if we do have too wait a year.

    ReplyDelete
  21. But if you'd had to endure all three movies at once, it would have lost a star anyway for the length!
    Completely enjoyed this one. Like you, been years since I read the book and I didn't mind the changes.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Thanks for the review, Fran. I'm hoping to see this very soon.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I've read many mixed reviews of this film and will wait now to see it on Blu-ray...
    Happy New Year BTW ;)

    ReplyDelete
  24. Nice review Fran. I need to get out and see this too before I'm the very last one!

    ReplyDelete
  25. None of us are happy about the 3 films to do the book, as it isn't necessary. I read this book when I was still a preteen so many times, I know every line of it. Took me away from my world it did and to a better place. If the movie doesn't maintain the integrity of Tolkien's work, I'll be perturbed.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I'm one of the few people out there who just.. didn't really seem to like it. I didn't know it was gonna get divided going into it, so I was just sitting there at the edge of my seat when all of a sudden the piece of crap decides to end! NO! It had these "scenic" scenes in it that weren't necessary, and they did prolong many of the details in comparison to the little ones they excluded overall, but I would've been much happier had it been maybe 3 hours and a half long with different editing and an ending. I WANTED MORE THAN THE DRAGON'S EYE!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, I think I would've been a lot happier had there been only one more movie. There's no need for 3, it was decent, but if it was gonna keep that pace it should just stop at two.

      Delete
  27. Yeah three films is dumb to do, stretching it out to make more dough, heard it was good from most all except it was too long.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Originally the plan was for two movies, so they wouldn't cut out anything major (Beorn). Eventually they realized this was the very last time they'd ever be able to visit Middle Earth, so we'll be seeing some things that aren't directly in the book.

    If I recall correctly we'll see the White Council drive Sauron out of southern Mirkwood (where he's in the guise of the Necromancer), as well as the defense of Loth Lorien and Lonely Mountain during the War of the Ring.

    There's a LOT of material they could touch on, and I'll watch them, and see how I feel they did.

    My one fear is being the guy that yells out "I've been there!" while seeing some of NZ countryside.

    ReplyDelete
  29. As one of the guys moaning about all that was left out of LotR, which might have stretched that to 4 movies, I don't suppose I should complain... except I gather bits have been added, that aren't in the book.

    I'm looking forwards to it, so thanks for the review and it backs up what my son in law and daughter said about it.

    I'm undecided whether PJ should tackle The Silmarillion or Lost Tales... if he can get 3 films out of the Hobbit, he's made for life with them.

    Happy New Year Fran!

    ReplyDelete
  30. My sons and I enjoyed the movie immensely. We were in Midde-Earth, again, for a brief time, and am sad that beyond two more journeys, we will bid adieu to it.

    ReplyDelete
  31. While I think it could have been shorter, I absolutely agree it didn't feel as long as it was. Or maybe with all movies being longer these days, I'm just getting used to it!

    ReplyDelete
  32. Glad you enjoyed the movie Fran.
    I kow what you mean about having to wait for the other movies, but to be honest, I don't mind to much, I can look forward to the dvd release in the meantime till the next one, and then the Extended edition... and then repeat the process for next Xmas and so on... It will keep my Middle-Earth interest and thus painting up LOTR stuff happily for the next couple of years at least... so long as my credit card can handle it!
    Thats the only thing that has rankled me - GW's prices! B*stards!!

    ReplyDelete
  33. I'll fur sure see the film as I'm a fan!

    Christopher

    ReplyDelete
  34. I really want to read the book again too now. I enjoyed it, but like most have stated. I'd prefer it to be just 2 movies instead of 3. I blame Hollywood.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I like that actor in Sherlock Holmes, a lot. I was given the book as a kid and sadly, haven't read it. But we have a copy and I should give it a read.

    Hope you're feeling better.

    ReplyDelete
  36. well, it's not showing here as of now.

    ReplyDelete
  37. So ~ Bilbo will be fighting the Smaug?!! Sounds a bit like the main employment of California.
    I was hoping they'd bring back Liv Tyler's character. Don't ask.
    Can't wait to have look-see!

    ReplyDelete
  38. I took my 10 year old son to see 'The Hobbit' the weekend that it opened, and he loved it. This is somevhat of a victory in our house as it normally takes a Playstation controller to get any type of positive reaction out of him.

    As for the story being spread out over 3 movies with extra bits from the Lost Tales...yeah I can live with that. I see it as a story set in a 6 movie Middle Saga.

    Great film.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Nice review mate.. and am in agreement. Hope you have a greta new year mate!

    ReplyDelete
  40. I have won tickets to see it at IMAX, and I'm looking forward to seeing it even more, now that I've read your excellent review! First thing I've won in ages.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Well, despite being sat behind the only Masai in Greater Manchester and getting a mumbled commentary from two gits a couple of rows behind, I thoroughly enjoyed the film. Probably more that the LOTR series maybe because it didn't seem determined to overawe (or maybe because I'm used to it now). I thought Martin Freeman nailed it in the first five minutes.

    I understand there's a fair bit of stuff included from the Lost Tales (Christopher Tolkein's attempt at a money spinner), but THREE films all pretending to be The Hobbit really is a bit of a piss take. However, if they changed the title(s) to something else it wouldn't be as marketable. Watch the money come rolling in eh?

    Cate Blanchett - now there's a fantasy worth having . . .

    ReplyDelete
  42. Thanks for the review Fran I was a bit iffy about thisfilm butrour review has swayed me into the "must see" category if my bladder could take it.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Aye must admit, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I had some misgivings, given some of the dwarves seemed to have not bothered with make-up and obviously I knew there'd be changes.

    Once I started watching, and got enthralled by the film, with how the dwarf characters interacted with each other and what not, all these were forgotten. Thoroughly enjoyed it, and like you the film flew by without feeling dragged out or anything. Think I'm going to go see it again.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I still just can't believe they're milking 3 movies out of a what, 250 page book? That's insane. With that said, I'll probably still see it, so you win again, Peter Jackson!

    ReplyDelete
  45. what do you mean part one... how many parts are there going to be?

    have a great one mister!

    jeremy

    ReplyDelete
  46. I will have a look at it when it's on DVD! For me it is a must see!

    Greetings
    Peter
    http://peterscave.blogspot.be/

    ReplyDelete